Not through direct usage tax, but probably through local taxes. And cycling and pedestrian infrastructure generally costs less per person-mile of capacity than

Not through direct usage tax, but probably through local taxes. And cycling and pedestrian infrastructure generally costs less per person-mile of capacity than car infrastructure. Those streets and sidewalks were created through public action, the public decided or elected people who decided that that was a good allocation of resources. Just like we decide that parking in some places is a good allocation of resources. Changing our minds on which thing to allocate resources to isn't an affront to our freedoms, when done in a way that is democratic or representative. The town deciding to build a park on some land instead of selling it to a developer to build a mall isn't an oppression of the mall builder's freedoms. It's just a choice. Personally I find having choices in how to move around is an increase in personal freedom. Needing to own, insure, maintain, and fuel a car to participate in a community is a financial burden, and a burden on those who have to deal with cars and traffic while trying to do things like walk across a giant parking lot to get between two locations that should be reasonable to walk between. Casting all decisions that do anything to take away public infrastructure for cars as a reduction in freedom is ridiculous.